Thursday, 7 July 2011

about 37% based on the truth

John said he would meet me at 5:45 but now it’s 5:47 and I don’t know what that means. Do I use my telephone to ask him for his whereabouts or would it just be better to sit here and wait?

I am not going to phone John instead I am going to wait because there are lots to think about. First on my list is memories an dhow they all fit in our brain, when I am 16 I remember being 6 but when 86 I can still remember that moment from 6 and moments in 16, 26, 36, etc. How do they all fit when neither my brain or scull expand over time? Do I compensate by only remembering that one day from 6, 16, 26, 36, etc., or can I also remember one moment at 26 and one at 23, or is it just the important ones that stay? I have no answers to these questions. I do not want them to be, but they definitely are – rhetorical. Maybe John will know the answer when he turns up (it is now 5:49) – or at least be able to give his side of that story, whatever it may be.

John has a bachelors in science, a BSc, but I have a bachelors of art, a BA, which means we are very compatible when we are together. John, with this questions about books to read, artists he thinks he should like, and me with silly theories about things, ones you can only get from not being a scientist and studying literature, etc. He can’t answer my physics or biology questions, though, as he was a chemistry major – my worst aspect of science. But you can’t win them all.

5:51. Still no sign of John but hat has got me thinking – we are all the lead man in our stories. Sitting her gazing at the commuters going by, they all look like strangers to me, just extras in my play; but for them, they are at the centre of each of their worlds, making great decisions, awful decisions, regrets. Whilst I am just an extra in their play, doing exactly the same. I don’t know if this would be an example of art or science, but I definitely think it would be a topic of conversation that we would both enjoy, John and I, and both be able to mull over. He’d say something about the nature of human beings, which I’d complement with a comment from Sartre or Nietzsche. Then the case would be closed.

No comments:

Post a Comment